09-04-2017, 02:43 AM
I'm a strange mix of conspiracy theorist (you might think that makes me gullible) and a skeptic (not easily falling for what so called (benevolent?) "authorities" tell us, so my next question is: Who rates the raters of raters?
I will in this case because I'm qualified.
A long time ago, I was a subscriber to Consumer Reports because I liked to buy quality to make my hard earned money get the best value. I read it cover to cover -- every issue. I was a trusting believer. It was great because I could have the benefit of knowledge for things for which I knew nothing or little ... at least in concept. Why would they do anything contrary to being trustworthy!
But, there was one cover feature that I didn't even read because it was my expertise. Consumer Reports rated bicycles. I worked in a bicycle shop as a wheel builder for professional bicycle racers. I was sought after by the professional racers as the only one they trusted to build their wheels. I really knew bicycles well. That is except for the one that was rated best that I've never seen.
Having rode with all the local bicycle racing teams and bicycle clubs, I knew a lot of people in the business including many bicycle shop owners. They laughed at my suggestion that they carry this top rated bicycle. One challenged me to read the article on that top rated bicycle which he refused to carry. I was puzzled as it was top rated by Consumer Reports!
Reading the article in his bicycle shop, I was horrified as he laughed. One of it's highest and most decisive scores where it did much better than the competition was the ratings of brake function. The ones that failed in that category were bicycles of excellent reputations. They failed because grasping the brake levers hard would throw the rider over the handlebars. The top rated bicycle won based on the brakes being best because they wouldn't throw the rider over the handlebars. In other words, this top rating for brake functionality was won because the brakes didn't work!
I don't question the honesty of Consumer Reports on that. They were correct. It's just the little thing that their criteria was backwards and their "experts" were expert only because they claimed to know about something foreign to them. They weren't bicycle riders at all except for maybe around the block.
I never trusted Consumer Reports since that day and cancelled my subscription. Other things I bought based on that misplaced trust later proved to be poor choices.
Other than that, Consumer Reports is good in theory -- just not in the real world.
[signature]
I will in this case because I'm qualified.
A long time ago, I was a subscriber to Consumer Reports because I liked to buy quality to make my hard earned money get the best value. I read it cover to cover -- every issue. I was a trusting believer. It was great because I could have the benefit of knowledge for things for which I knew nothing or little ... at least in concept. Why would they do anything contrary to being trustworthy!
But, there was one cover feature that I didn't even read because it was my expertise. Consumer Reports rated bicycles. I worked in a bicycle shop as a wheel builder for professional bicycle racers. I was sought after by the professional racers as the only one they trusted to build their wheels. I really knew bicycles well. That is except for the one that was rated best that I've never seen.
Having rode with all the local bicycle racing teams and bicycle clubs, I knew a lot of people in the business including many bicycle shop owners. They laughed at my suggestion that they carry this top rated bicycle. One challenged me to read the article on that top rated bicycle which he refused to carry. I was puzzled as it was top rated by Consumer Reports!
Reading the article in his bicycle shop, I was horrified as he laughed. One of it's highest and most decisive scores where it did much better than the competition was the ratings of brake function. The ones that failed in that category were bicycles of excellent reputations. They failed because grasping the brake levers hard would throw the rider over the handlebars. The top rated bicycle won based on the brakes being best because they wouldn't throw the rider over the handlebars. In other words, this top rating for brake functionality was won because the brakes didn't work!
I don't question the honesty of Consumer Reports on that. They were correct. It's just the little thing that their criteria was backwards and their "experts" were expert only because they claimed to know about something foreign to them. They weren't bicycle riders at all except for maybe around the block.
I never trusted Consumer Reports since that day and cancelled my subscription. Other things I bought based on that misplaced trust later proved to be poor choices.
Other than that, Consumer Reports is good in theory -- just not in the real world.
[signature]